דרש רבא: אשה לא תכנס לדיר העצים ליטול מהן אוד, ואוד שנשבר אסור להסיקו ביום טוב, לפי שמסיקין בכלים ואין מסיקין בשברי כלים.
[1]Rava expounded: A woman may not enter a woodshed to take from it [a piece of wood for use as] a poker [with which to stir coals] and on a festival day the kindling of a poker [which had been designated for its purpose before the festival, but] which broke [on a festival day] is prohibited, because we may fuel [a fire] with [undamaged] utensils, but we may not fuel [a fire] with broken utensils.
[1] A parallel version is found in bShab 124a.
@Manuscript evidence
לדיר העצים
into the woodshed: MSS Fol.Add.Opp. 23 (366), HARL. 5508 (400) and Vatican 134 read: לבית העצים (into the wood-house). MSS Göttingen 3, München 95 and Oxford – Bodl. Heb. C. 17 (2661) 58 read: לתוך עצים (into the wood) and MS Oxford – Bodl. Heb. E. 52 (2678) reads: לבין העצים (in between the wood).
@General observations
The Mishnah forbids the use of wood stacked in a storage hut (mBets 4:1). In mBets 4:2 the Mishnah describes the places from which wood may be brought to use as fuel on a festival day. It does not state who performs the labor. In its discussion of this mishnah, the gemara presents a ruling about kindling on a festival day. We have here a tannaitic tradition, passed down in the name of a first generation amora. Here Rava is following the ruling of Rabbi Yehudah, who claimed that wood may not be used for any purpose other than kindling, unless it had been made into a utensil prior to the festival day. A stick that had been designated as a poker before the festival day is not considered muqtseh; therefore, it may be used for any purpose, even for kindling. When it breaks, it has the status of a broken utensil and becomes muqtseh.
@Feminist observations
This case refers only to women, which demonstrates that women most likely performed the described action. The prohibition against women entering a woodshed turns out, however, to apply to everyone. Based on a discussion of women’s daily routine, a general halakhic rule was again formulated for men and women alike.
Furthermore, it is obvious that this ruling was stated in the name of Rava, who was married to a very educated woman. His wife was the daughter of his teacher, Rav Hisda, and described throughout the Bavli as well versed in halakhah.[1]
[1] For an in-depth discussion of the role of Rav Hisda’s daughter and her relationship to Rava see WEISBERG, “Desirable but Dangerous,” 143. And see also in Bavli 3/6 (bBetsah 24a-b).